Featured Why Did Christ Have To Die?

Jesus died in order to have His father glorified by His death and resurrection, as He fulfilled the prophecies of the coming Messiah from God!

 

Such a simple question (Why did Jesus have to die) you would think the Bible would provide the answer!

Lets see, the wages of sin is death. Since God is holy, those who sin must, according to God's attribute of justice, be separated from God. If we are in union with God, we are alive (Ephesians 2:5) but if we are separated then we are not alive. Dead. We are conceived in iniquity, a separated from God state, because again iniquity has no union with our holy God.

So how is this problem solved, how do we get transferred from the realm of darkness, into the kingdom of God. How can this penalty be paid or this sin burden be removed, so we are justified.

So without needless obfuscation, Christ had to die to pay the ransom, and this sin offering had to be perfect and blameless.

So by the numbers:

1) God is holy and is separated from sin.

2) Adam sinned and the consequence is that the many were made sinners, separated from God.

3) To restore our union with God, our sin burden, the penalty of separation, had to be removed.

4) Christ died to pay the penalty, so that He could redeem whoever believes in Him.

 

Jesus Christ had to die in order that sinful man could be reconciled to Holy God. Only through the shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ through His sacrificial death could this be accomplished.

Romans 5:11, {KJV} And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

Romans 5:11, {ASV} and not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

In order to reconcile sinful man to Holy God Jesus Christ made the necessary propitiatory sacrifice for sin.

Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Furthermore Jesus Christ had to die to pay the ransom price of redemption.

Mark 10:45. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

 

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Hebrews 2:14

And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 1 Cor 15:17

opening and alleging, 'That the Christ it behoved to suffer, and to rise again out of the dead, and that this is the Christ -- Jesus whom I proclaim to you.' Acts 17:3 YLT


I believe he had to die and to be made alive again from the dead in order to destroy death and him who had the power of death, that is the devil.

 

13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

 

Great OP

We've possibly each had a person tell us they are going to be granted eternal life due to being good. I've heard it recently and at many funerals about how the deceased is now in Heaven, after all, he or she was a good person.

What wickedness there is in such a claim. Where is Christ in this? Why is He typically mentioned last in this context, if at all, as if He must be thrown into the mix if there happens to be some religious person there? Why is the truth that He actually died to save wicked sinners including the deceased who was in all actuality as the rest of mankind a lost sinner at some point (Eph. 2:1-4)? Ask these people 'Why then did Jesus have to die'? Go ahead, arouse the Pharisees.

For the most part they don't get it, they see themselves as good, not depraved, they don't see themselves as ungodly, but good and godly (John 9:41?). Just ask one of them if they are 'saved' then mention to them, 'Yes, I remember when you were ungodly'. (Romans 5:6)

Then duck.

 

And of course I would disagree with Van that we are all born dead in sin. Paul said that he was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and he died.

Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

Paul is clearly describing when he learned the law and came to know what sin is in this passage (vs. 7). He says he would not have known sin but for the law, he would not have known lust, except the law had said, thou shalt not covet. Note all of the emphasis is on KNOWLEDGE. It is knowledge that makes a man responsible and accountable, without law sin is not imputed.

There are many other scriptures to support man is not born dead in sin, when the prodigal son repented, twice Jesus said he was alive AGAIN.

Luk 15:24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Luk 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

If we were all born dead in sin as Van (and almost everyone else here at BB) believes, then no man could said to be alive AGAIN, but that is exactly what Jesus himself said.

These statements by Paul and Jesus clearly argue we are not born dead in sin, but spiritually die when we willingly and knowingly choose to sin.

Jesus had to die to pay for our sins. He had to rise from the dead so that he could sprinkle his blood on the mercy seat in heaven. This is why the scripture says that if he did not rise we would still be in our sins.

1 Cor 15:7 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

Our faith does not save, if Jesus had not risen from the dead, our faith would be vain and would not save us. It is Jesus' death and resurrection that saved us, but we must place faith in Jesus to receive this grace.

 

If the question of "Why did Christ have to die?" is related to the Reformed notions of Total Depravity and Unconditional Election, then it must also pertain to the doctrine of Limited Atonement.

Did Christ die only for the sake of the elect, or for everyone?

Christ's death paid the penalty for not only the inner man (spirit), but also the outer man (body).

If Christ's atonement didn't make restitution for the flesh, then nobody would be raised.

Now here's the problem for Limited Atonement: Even Unbelievers Will Be Raised Physically

Since unbelievers will be raised physically (John 5:28-29), then it MUST mean that His sacrifice atoned for their bodily corruption.


If Jesus died only for the elect, then unbelievers will not be raised bodily - which is against scripture

 

JamesL

false..there is a natural body...there is a spiritual body

no problem at all...they will be given a spiritual body that can endure the second death

no..not at all

He did die a Covenant death for them

they will be raised to endure torment....according to scripture.

 

I hope you don't think "spiritual body" means spirit-based body. Whatever you think it means, you are obviously off track.

Read 1Cor 15 where Paul uses multiple contrasts to tell us of the resurrection body.

Perishable vs imperishable
Corruptible vs incorruptible
Dishonor vs glory
Natural vs spiritual

They're slightly different from one translation to another. BUT, compare how Paul uses those words elsewhere, and it SHOULD be easy to see that they can be generally summed up as:

Sin-wrecked vs not sin-wrecked

Jesus said "touch me" and "I am not a ghost", and He is the first fruits of resurrection. By the act of one, the many were made sinners. But by the act of another, the many will be made righteous.

Read Romans 5 and 1Cor 15, both clearly in the context of physical death and resurrection. You may not see it because of a delusional concept of Original Sin, but I hope you do

If the dead aren't raised, then neither was Christ. And if Christ was not raised then we are still in our sins.

You need to leave your gnostic inclinations. Christ was raised physically. Really. Literally. Incorruptible. Imperishable.
And so will all of mankind be raised. Some to eternal life, and some to eternal torment

 

so do you deny there is a spiritual body for clearly says the natural comes first then after that the spiritual

 

Judging from my earlier post, does it look like I deny there is a spiritual body?

But how about something different for a change? How about you actually investigate what I wrote, instead of tossing around a tit-for-tat?

I'd rather not turn this into a girl fight with scratching of eyes and accusations of lying and misrepresentation.

I briefly explained the correlation between incorruptible, imperishable, spiritual, etc. And I am more than willing to explain further. But not for the sake of arguing, or high-fiving others who might agree.

But before I go into a proper understanding of what"spiritual body" means, it is imperative that you to explain exactly what you think it means. After all, you mentioned it first. That seems only fair

And I would prefer it to be in your own words, not in a web link ir a copy/paste job. Be clear, and leave nothing to interpretation. No mystical jargon, gnostic mysteries, or catch-phrase Christianese.

If you're ok with that, by all means...let's iron this thing out

 

JamesL

Yes...that is what it looked like

Sure...here is what you posted;lets investigate-

You do not understand the passage...yet you say I am off track?

You are not totally off track...except you mix and confuse the terms physically,and bodily..i will show this shortly.....

Well if you are to attain your stated goal...then you should not post such things as this;

1-

2-

3-

4-

Your statements are flawed and misguided...but let's proceed anyway....

.

You did go to a correct portion of scripture...but you missed the main point totally...I will show you here;
The scripture is in blue.....I will answer in my own words in dark red according to your request:laugh:

not sure what you are talking about.

We do not know what God has not detailed for us....for example..what are angelic bodies made of? what kind of material....how did angels appear in scripture...sometimes looking like men, or soldiers,..sometimes as winged creatures....where did they get the clothes from, or the appearance of clothes? I believe they appeared as described....but we are not told what they are made of or the extent of their power.

In the same way..what is a Spiritual body? what is it made of? how can unbelievers not be destroyed as they are in torment? We are not told....we are told it is so,
,

.

You would have been better off with a link, or a cut andpaste article that could offer a clearer and more focused point of view and teaching.Why would you want a lesser response by an untrained person, over a more gifted teacher who could offer much more? Do you want truth, no matter where it comes from....or are you hoping that perhaps I might mis-speak and you can jump on my words and feel like you "won the day"???


If you're ok with that, by all means...let's iron this thing out[/QUOTE]

 

So, those that never willingly and knowingly choose to sin don't need to be saved, right?

 

LOL.....what a boring life that must be....Like Lancelot (C'est Moi) :love2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdrEmZ35fxc

 

I'm just curious to see if Winman has changed his take of the elder brother in the parable of the prodigal son who never left home and never sinned, or the ninety nine sheep that never went astray, or the nine coins that were never lost, etc.

 

Better yet ask him if he represented any of these himself. :thumbs:

 

It seems to me He has maybe built his very own theology upon the riddles and dark sayings of Christ. Some of those parables are heap big medicine to him.